Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759979AbYGFXHM (ORCPT ); Sun, 6 Jul 2008 19:07:12 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756785AbYGFXG7 (ORCPT ); Sun, 6 Jul 2008 19:06:59 -0400 Received: from smtp6.pp.htv.fi ([213.243.153.40]:52111 "EHLO smtp6.pp.htv.fi" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754955AbYGFXG6 (ORCPT ); Sun, 6 Jul 2008 19:06:58 -0400 Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2008 02:06:10 +0300 From: Adrian Bunk To: Linus Torvalds Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Andrew Morton , Natalie Protasevich , Kernel Testers List , Maximilian Engelhardt , Randy Dunlap , "Paul E. McKenney" , James Bottomley , Domenico Andreoli Subject: Re: 2.6.26-rc9: Reported regressions from 2.6.25 Message-ID: <20080706230610.GK21669@cs181140183.pp.htv.fi> References: <200807062002.46863.rjw@sisk.pl> <20080706182648.GE21669@cs181140183.pp.htv.fi> <200807062304.07443.rjw@sisk.pl> <20080706213214.GH21669@cs181140183.pp.htv.fi> <20080706221932.GJ21669@cs181140183.pp.htv.fi> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2224 Lines: 58 On Sun, Jul 06, 2008 at 03:27:30PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > On Mon, 7 Jul 2008, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > > > When did you tell me that maintainers should not or cannot be Cc'ed on > > regression reports? > > That is not what I'm complaining about. That is what I wrote in the part of my email you made this comment on. > I'm complaining about the fact that you *always* argue against closing > bugreports. I'm not always against closing bugs, and e.g. during the last years I've closed at about 500 bugs in the kernel Bugzilla due to submitters having vanished. > You have argued against it for over a YEAR now. And every single time I > tell you that you are wrong, and exactly *why* you are wrong. > > If a reporter doesn't respond to say "it's still open", it needs to be > closed. It doesn't matter one whit whether there has been developer action > on it or not. We cannot keep old reports open - it's a total waste for > developers to even _look_ at anything that is more than roughly a month > old and hasn't been verified to be still be an issue. We only differ on whether a human should ask this question once before closing a bug or whether regular automated requests are enough. E.g. although Andrew has't responded to Rafaels emails for nearly a month whether the slab corruption he reported is still present I wouldn't take this as a definitive indication that he won't answer when someone has a question. I'd bet Andrew will answer if a human asks him about the status of this regression. A developer asking manually "Is this still present?" does cost nearly no time and gives the submitter a much better feeling than only automated emails and then a bug close. > Linus cu Adrian -- "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days. "Only a promise," Lao Er said. Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/